Prosecutor's office investigates non-compliance with Constitutional Court ruling on land compensation
Translated from Latvian, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- The Prosecutor General's Office has initiated an investigation into the failure to comply with a Constitutional Court ruling from December 10, 2025.
- The ruling mandated the parliament to establish a system for landowners to receive adequate compensation when land use fees do not cover property taxes or are disproportionately small.
- Parliament is currently considering amendments to a law concerning land use fee compensation, aiming to ensure landowners can claim compensation from the state under specific conditions.
Latvia's Prosecutor General's Office has launched an investigation into the parliament's alleged failure to implement a crucial Constitutional Court ruling. The probe, initiated on July 17, centers on the non-fulfillment of a December 10, 2025, court decision that mandated the creation of a compensation mechanism for landowners.
The court stipulated that landowners must receive adequate compensation when the fees collected for the legal use of their land do not cover property tax payments, or when the remaining compensation is disproportionately small after taxes. The Prosecutor's Office has formally requested information from the Saeima (parliament) regarding its progress in establishing this compensation order and the reasons for any delays.
Meanwhile, the Saeima has taken steps toward addressing the issue, approving amendments to the Law on Compensation for Land Legal Use Fees in its first reading in June. These amendments aim to rectify situations where land use fees are insufficient to cover property taxes and to compensate for financial losses incurred due to restrictions on property rights. If passed in subsequent readings, the changes would allow landowners to claim compensation from the state under specific circumstances.
The Constitutional Court had previously declared the existing regulations on land legal use fees and cadastral valuation non-compliant with the constitution. The court found that the balance between landowners' rights to fair compensation and the protection of property owners' interests was not adequately met. It specifically highlighted scenarios where the universal cadastral value used for calculating land use fees resulted in lower compensation for landowners after property taxes were paid, compared to previous arrangements.
Originally published by Delfi Latvia in Latvian. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.